A new report claims Canadian telecoms Rogers and Bell Canada have an early version of a much-rumored Apple television set in their labs and are in negotiations with the company to enter into a partnership for the device.

An anonymous source disclosed to The Globe and Mail that both Rogers and Bell "already have the product in their labs," the newspaper reported on Monday.

Another source familiar with the negotiations said Apple is open to working with multiple companies for its connected TV project, which some have dubbed the "iTV." The tipster indicated that Rogers and Bell had been approached by Apple during its search for partners.

“They’re not closed to doing it with one [company] or doing it with two,” the source said. “They’re looking for a partner. They’re looking for someone with wireless and broadband capabilities.”

All of the companies involved declined to comment when contacted by the publication. Both Rogers and Bell already have an existing agreement with Apple to offer its iPhone device on their wireless networks.

The report characterized Apple's TV project as a "large-screen iPad" for living rooms, adding that the Siri voice-recognition assistant that debuted in the iPhone 4S will likely make its way into the rumored television. It also mentioned the use of "hand gestures" to control the device, though it didn't go into further detail on what exactly that would entail.

Insider tips that Rogers and Bell have working prototypes of the Apple television come quickly on the heels of an analyst report that specifically mentioned the two companies as likely to be on board with the project. Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said on Monday that Apple's best option may be to cooperate with existing cable operators.

“We believe it is likely to be offered by AT&amp;T and Verizon in the U.S. and Bell and Rogers in Canada,” Misek said.

The as-yet-unconfirmed Apple television project also recently made headlines when it was revealed that Best Buy made mention in a recent survey of a "concept" 42-inch iOS-powered TV from Apple. The questionnaire said the device "finally reinvents what a TV can do" and suggested it would be priced at $1,499, support iCloud, feature remote control via iPad or iPhone, and sport an "iSight" camera and microphone.

I hope it's legit. I hope Apple has given these guys actual televisions with Apple TV hardware inside.

And then they NEVER RELEASE IT. They just release an updated Apple TV. And yeah, then all these leakers get punished.

"But why build it into a TV if they were only ever going to release the box?"

To have complete control over the testing environment in which the box resides. Simple.

I hope it's true actually (as I'd love one) and that the rumored 42 inch is the baby of a range going up to at least 60 inch if not beyond. The price rumored in earlier articles seems a but steep for a 42 inch to me if Apple want to own this market too in a couple of years.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Its one thing to leak stuff on a forum board where you could be just writing BS and another thing to leak it to a newspaper. The best Buy leak is a control leak for disinformation, but this is serious leakage.
shame...

It also mentioned the use of "hand gestures" to control the device, though it didn't go into further detail on what exactly that would entail.

This proves 100% that it's a fake device and that Apple sent it out to catch leakers.

"Hand gestures". Really. Let's see what The Guide has to say about hand gestures:

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

A loud clatter of gunk music flooded through the Heart of Gold cabin as Zaphod searched the sub-etha radio wave bands for news of himself. The machine was rather difficult to operate. For years radios had been operated by means of pressing buttons and turning dials; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive--you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you had to do was wave your hand in the general direction of the components and hope. It saved a lot of muscular expenditure, of course, but meant that you had to sit infuriatingly still if you wanted to keep listening to the same program.

There's no big mystery to what Apple is trying to do with their 'iTV'. Just take a look at Apple TV and see that you already can view programs from all the major networks by simply choosing the network. The interface is so simple to use and 'just works'. Voice and gesture recognition will only make it easier to use. As for programming, Apple wants to expand this to the point where just subscribe to different channels and/or or just TV shows. This requires disaggregating cable feeds and having the same programming stream over the internet to Apple's hardware (as I doubt cableco's will give Apple access to the encryption behind their cable boxes so that cable can be directly connected to Apple's hardware). Steve Jobs mentioned this years ago as being the huge hurdle. As broadcasters see people moving to watching shows online, in addition to delivering their won shows online themselves a la Hulu, they are looking for new revenue streams. Being able to stream directly to a TV a la Netflix in a manner which makes it very easy for consumers to operate the TV and choose programs is what iTV will be all about. The technology to stream to a TV is already there in Apple TV, Siri is already being offered on iPhone 4S's, gesture recognition is already available a la Kinect (but of course Apple will have their own) and all that is required is more content and having this all in one box.

I guess what I don't get is why it's necessary for Apple to offer the TV display itself since all this can easily be offered in AppleTV and therefore work with any set from any manufacturer. After all, all that is required is to have the feed and to control it. That can easily all reside outside of the TV as it does now with Apple TV.

I guess what I don't get is why it's necessary for Apple to offer the TV display itself since all this can easily be offered in AppleTV and therefore work with any set from any manufacturer. After all, all that is required is to have the feed and to control it. That can easily all reside outside of the TV as it does now with Apple TV.

That to me is the million dollar question, and the one that remains unanswered. The only rumor that has alluded to a feature apple could actually offer the tv itself was that patent which allowed the remote to magically learn all of the connected devices.

There's no big mystery to what Apple is trying to do with their 'iTV'. Just take a look at Apple TV and see that you already can view programs from all the major networks by simply choosing the network. The interface is so simple to use and 'just works'. Voice and gesture recognition will only make it easier to use. As for programming, Apple wants to expand this to the point where just subscribe to different channels and/or or just TV shows. This requires disaggregating cable feeds and having the same programming stream over the internet to Apple's hardware (as I doubt cableco's will give Apple access to the encryption behind their cable boxes so that cable can be directly connected to Apple's hardware). Steve Jobs mentioned this years ago as being the huge hurdle. As broadcasters see people moving to watching shows online, in addition to delivering their won shows online themselves a la Hulu, they are looking for new revenue streams. Being able to stream directly to a TV a la Netflix in a manner which makes it very easy for consumers to operate the TV and choose programs is what iTV will be all about. The technology to stream to a TV is already there in Apple TV, Siri is already being offered on iPhone 4S's, gesture recognition is already available a la Kinect (but of course Apple will have their own) and all that is required is more content and having this all in one box.

I guess what I don't get is why it's necessary for Apple to offer the TV display itself since all this can easily be offered in AppleTV and therefore work with any set from any manufacturer. After all, all that is required is to have the feed and to control it. That can easily all reside outside of the TV as it does now with Apple TV.

Hopefully the competition will be like you and still don't get it. Has long has Google still tries to bypass cable and deliver internet only TV feeds we are ok, damage is not so bad. Thats its, they are just making another ATV2.

Was reading the comments on the Globe and Mail. Apparently most people have no idea how undoable it is to deliver live feed over the net. Neither Cable or DSL are even close to have the bandwight for it.

I'm sorry, and I know there are tons of theories, but I don't believe for a second that this new TV will include a display.

The current TV is $99.
Most TV manufacturers are losing money selling TVs
Since there is no profit in a display, Apple is not going to integrate TV with a display.

Consumers will put 2+2 together....

An average price for a much better than average 50" display is about $2000, give or take a couple hundred.
+
TV costs (in its current form) $99

Then the consumer will start scratching their collective heads and say: "Hey, why am I buying this integrated TV for $3500 (which is what Apple will have to sell it for in order to keep their gross margin at ~40%) when I can get a display and an TV separately and save $1200-1300?"

I just don't buy it.

IMHO, I think it's going to be a beautiful little box (similar to the current form) with a lot of magical goodness inside (in the form of a specialized iOS) and the killer app is how you control it. That's what Steve "cracked".

Was reading the comments on the Globe and Mail. Apparently most people have no idea how undoable it is to deliver live feed over the net. Neither Cable or DSL are even close to have the bandwight for it.

People also don't seem to get that cable finally has competition.

You talk big about other folks not getting things but you're wrong about cable bandwidth.

Where FiOS is competing with Comcast they are doing node splits to provide competitive bandwidth and reducing port congestion...or so I've been told.

Your last post regarding iptv is off the mark given you can do ip multicast (ie live feed) on docsis. With the channel bonding in 3.0 you can provide high QoS for VOIP and other more important services while providing high bandwidth services like VOD and live feeds and CCAP gear is under going lab and field trials at Comcast.

I'm sorry, and I know there are tons of theories, but I don't believe for a second that this new TV will include a display.

The current TV is $99.
Most TV manufacturers are losing money selling TVs
Since there is no profit in a display, Apple is not going to integrate TV with a display.

Consumers will put 2+2 together....

An average price for a much better than average 50" display is about $2000, give or take a couple hundred.
+
TV costs (in its current form) $99

Then the consumer will start scratching their collective heads and say: "Hey, why am I buying this integrated TV for $3500 (which is what Apple will have to sell it for in order to keep their gross margin at ~40%) when I can get a display and an TV separately and save $1200-1300?"

I just don't buy it.

IMHO, I think it's going to be a beautiful little box (similar to the current form) with a lot of magical goodness inside (in the form of a specialized iOS) and the killer app is how you control it. That's what Steve "cracked".

Sale price.......$299

Maybe, but my guess is that there are enough people out there that would rather have an Apple designed and spec'd television set where the whole experience is an Apple experience. The tv manufacturers are already trying their hardest to accomplish their own version of this - so the pairing idea of the Apple tv to a set that has a completely different gui doesn't fit in with what they are trying to do.

As far as pricing goes, Apple holds a lot of power in numbers - they've owned the iPod market, created the iPhone smartphone market as we know it today and changed the ultra portable notebook market - all with pricing that may have seemed to be higher than the competition at first, but when you compare...apples to apples (sorry, had to do it) it's clear that Apple can make more money selling at a competitive or even lower price than their competition.

I'd make the leap if they hit the magic price to performance (and visual) ratio that I'm sure they will.

Where FiOS is competing with Comcast they are doing node splits to provide competitive bandwidth and reducing port congestion...or so I've been told.

Your last post regarding iptv is off the mark given you can do ip multicast (ie live feed) on docsis. With the channel bonding in 3.0 you can provide high QoS for VOIP and other more important services while providing high bandwidth services like VOD and live feeds and CCAP gear is under going lab and field trials at Comcast.

Cable has competition in SOME markets. Effectively none in others.

Aint multicast limited to the cable feeds? You can deliver multiple live feeds coming from the net in volume? I know Bell IPTV use multicast (for there TV feeds), but i was not going to say this here, much more easier to understand that you broadcast to nodes then stream to house then trying to explain multicast to nodes than stream to house.

If this tech is still in labs and not deploy imo lots of networks still can't handle large numbers of feeds. Would be nice indeed to be able to multicast anything the net brings, that would mean IPTV without using the ISP feeds. Lots of people want this to cut cable.

A new report claims Canadian telecoms Rogers and Bell Canada have an early version of a much-rumored Apple television set in their labs and are in negotiations with the company to enter into a partnership for the device.

An anonymous source disclosed to The Globe and Mail that both Rogers and Bell "already have the product in their labs," the newspaper reported on Monday.

Another source familiar with the negotiations said Apple is open to working with multiple companies for its connected TV project, which some have dubbed the "iTV." The tipster indicated that Rogers and Bell had been approached by Apple during its search for partners.

“They’re not closed to doing it with one [company] or doing it with two,” the source said. “They’re looking for a partner. They’re looking for someone with wireless and broadband capabilities.”

All of the companies involved declined to comment when contacted by the publication. Both Rogers and Bell already have an existing agreement with Apple to offer its iPhone device on their wireless networks.

The report characterized Apple's TV project as a "large-screen iPad" for living rooms, adding that the Siri voice-recognition assistant that debuted in the iPhone 4S will likely make its way into the rumored television. It also mentioned the use of "hand gestures" to control the device, though it didn't go into further detail on what exactly that would entail.

Insider tips that Rogers and Bell have working prototypes of the Apple television come quickly on the heels of an analyst report that specifically mentioned the two companies as likely to be on board with the project. Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said on Monday that Apple's best option may be to cooperate with existing cable operators.

“We believe it is likely to be offered by AT&amp;T and Verizon in the U.S. and Bell and Rogers in Canada,” Misek said.

The as-yet-unconfirmed Apple television project also recently made headlines when it was revealed that Best Buy made mention in a recent survey of a "concept" 42-inch iOS-powered TV from Apple. The questionnaire said the device "finally reinvents what a TV can do" and suggested it would be priced at $1,499, support iCloud, feature remote control via iPad or iPhone, and sport an "iSight" camera and microphone.

Let's see. Not sure about Bell, but isn't Rogers a 'cable' company first?

And why do you think that Apple's TV is powered by 'cell phone signals'? What is wrong with WiFi?

In the western half of Canada at least, neither of these companies have anything but cell towers. They are phone companies. Neither Rogers nor Bell even effectively covers my city with phone signal let alone the 50-100 Mbps required for TV

I meant "first" as in before talking to the cable companies or the media companies.

WiFi is not cell, and bandwidth is more expensive on the phone than any other way.

Again, what problems are solved by partnering with cell phone companies? (the two mentioned in the USA are also cell phone companies). What possible involvement could the phone companies have with an Apple branded television that they need prototypes of the device to test?

Remember also that according to supply chain reports, if an Apple branded TV exists it's in the part sampling, early prototype stage. Yet there is something about it that necessitates the phone companies signing off on the design?

If this is real, then it must be something completely unexpected and from further afield than any other Apple product ever known. If true it will be more surprising that their most surprising product announcement (the iPod), which was only surprising because it was an entirely new kind of device for them at the time. An Apple TV is not that. It's an expected extension of their current business.

Apple needs to find the source of these leaks and fire the employees or drop the vendors responsible

The idea that Apple would be handing anyone a prototype, but especially a telecom, is so out there that I suspect that it is bogus. In fact I wouldn't be shocked if it was revealed that Apple is the source of such insane rumors because then no one will actually try to dig

The idea that Apple would be handing anyone a prototype, but especially a telecom, is so out there that I suspect that it is bogus. In fact I wouldn't be shocked if it was revealed that Apple is the source of such insane rumors because then no one will actually try to dig

Here's my opinion, keep in mind I don't know anything more than anyone else:
The new iTV device is could probably either be an add-on box (like the existing one) that adds the required electronics to integrate Siri (Processor capacity, noise cancelation,) Natural Interfaces (hand/face identification with cameras) and probably bluetooth remotes.
If it's an actual real TV think of a 42" iPad but instead of multitouch, it can tell peoples hand positions.

As for Bell and Rogers. Bell has both Satellite and DSL, integrating "iTV" into either connection is rather dubious. Rogers has Cable, Wireless (HSPA+/LTE.) Bell and Rogers have a WiMax network (Inukshuk) but are doing nothing with it, just sitting on the spectrum.

Both carriers are rated poor when it comes to internet speed. So even if they had such devices, unless they're willing to actually improve their networks to support television instead of complaining about bandwidth hogs, I think such rumors are far fetched.

Why, as it is, most of the mobile companies are struggling to keep up with the data demands of smart phones now they want to serve TV programs too.. For one thing, it means more investments on the network improvements and in turn means it will cost more for consumers using their networks.. it will even affect users who don't use iTV too.. I dont think it will work that way!!. I guess time will tell.

I see how Bell and AT&T can deliver the feeds, but Rogers and Verizon I just don't get it. Those guys have land lines? They are going to offer wireless TV packages ?!?

Verizon FIOS.

Verizon has land lines in some places in the US and AT&T does in other areas. I can get AT&T U-Verse in my area and had them for a while. I have cut the cord at the moment though. U-Verse was okay though, better than Comcrap or satellite IMO.

Apple needs to find the source of these leaks and fire the employees or drop the vendors responsible

I think you're a very silly person, because you take rumors at face value. You are assuming this is based on an actual leak and factual evidence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

I hope it's legit. I hope Apple has given these guys actual televisions with Apple TV hardware inside.

And then they NEVER RELEASE IT. They just release an updated Apple TV. And yeah, then all these leakers get punished.

"But why build it into a TV if they were only ever going to release the box?"

To have complete control over the testing environment in which the box resides. Simple.

Do they typically lend prototypes in such a manner? Apple seems quite protective with this stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmgregory1

Maybe, but my guess is that there are enough people out there that would rather have an Apple designed and spec'd television set where the whole experience is an Apple experience. The tv manufacturers are already trying their hardest to accomplish their own version of this - so the pairing idea of the Apple tv to a set that has a completely different gui doesn't fit in with what they are trying to do.

As far as pricing goes, Apple holds a lot of power in numbers - they've owned the iPod market, created the iPhone smartphone market as we know it today and changed the ultra portable notebook market - all with pricing that may have seemed to be higher than the competition at first, but when you compare...apples to apples (sorry, had to do it) it's clear that Apple can make more money selling at a competitive or even lower price than their competition.

I'd make the leap if they hit the magic price to performance (and visual) ratio that I'm sure they will.

*sigh* they don't really sell at a lower price. The iphone is heavily subsidized. The Air is somewhat reverse engineered to the price point of its bottom spec. Displays are something where Apple hasn't done a very good job. The TB display has issues. The older Cinema displays had massive issues (including reliability). The original Apple lcd displays were beyond awful. Many of them broke in one to two years. i've owned plenty of Macs, but nothing would make me buy an Apple tv.

The only way I can see this happen is that Apple introduces an aTV certification program for TV set makers, to ensure that
(i) either an aTV motherboard is included in the TV
(ii) or the TV and its inputs can be properly controlled by Apple's very own aTV settop box.